The Post Office Horizon Enquiry
News0 min ago
Boris Still Living In Cloud Cuckoo Land
This deluded fool still thinks Brexit was a good idea – one of many reasons to ensure he never has any future roll in British politics.
https:/
If want the low down on the Brexiteer lies and what a disaster Brexit has been for the UK, watch this youtube video:-
https:/
If want the low down on the Brexiteer lies and what a disaster Brexit has been for the UK, watch this youtube video:-
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Hymie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Here is one of Farage’s whoppers – which has gullible fools believing that the unelected European Commission was the sole arbiter of EU laws; with Farage pointing out how undemocratic this is, and that we should vote to leave this undemocratic organisation. Whereas in reality, the EU is far more democratic than the UK parliament.
Farage accused the European Commission of being the sole arbiter of legislation in the European Union.
In reality the Commission takes it priorities from elected member state governments (the Council) and performs a role more akin to the British civil service. The third institution, the European Parliament, is made up of directly elected MEPs.
Farage can’t claim he doesn’t know this, having been an MEP for over 10 years.
Farage accused the European Commission of being the sole arbiter of legislation in the European Union.
In reality the Commission takes it priorities from elected member state governments (the Council) and performs a role more akin to the British civil service. The third institution, the European Parliament, is made up of directly elected MEPs.
Farage can’t claim he doesn’t know this, having been an MEP for over 10 years.
"Farage accused the European Commission of being the sole arbiter of legislation in the European Union." - well it is.
"In reality the Commission takes it priorities from elected member state governments (the Council) and performs a role more akin to the British civil service." - it may take it's priorities from member state but that's more akin to a suggestion box. The commission is the supreme power in the EUSSR
"The third institution, the European Parliament, is made up of directly elected MEPs. " - well they are elected but have no actual legislative power.
"In reality the Commission takes it priorities from elected member state governments (the Council) and performs a role more akin to the British civil service." - it may take it's priorities from member state but that's more akin to a suggestion box. The commission is the supreme power in the EUSSR
"The third institution, the European Parliament, is made up of directly elected MEPs. " - well they are elected but have no actual legislative power.
//In the article Boris repeats the lie about the UK being able to roll out the Covid vaccine faster because we had left the EU.//
You seem to relish in raising the same topics over and over again (presumably in the hope that eventually your point will stick). In that vein, I think we’ve done to vaccine thing once or twice (or maybe a hundred times) before. But just in case we haven’t, here’s an article that supports your view:
https:/
As I’ve said previously, I accept that the legislation in place at the time did not prevent the UK from going it’s own way. What I reject is the idea that it would actually have done so. Here’s a very important extract from the above article’s conclusions:
“For the vaccine rollout, the EU decided to work together for vaccine procurement and rollout, and it is possible that if the UK had still been in the EU it would have taken a different course, which meant vaccine rollout might have been slower.”
I would say it’s more than possible. I would suggest it’s an absolute stone cold certainty.
Mrs von der Leyen made it quite clear that vaccine procurement would be achieved on an EU wide basis and that the EU, not national governments, would secure supplies and control distribution. That is set out in this strategy paper:
https:/
"The objectives of the EU Vaccines Strategy are:
- to secure timely access to vaccines for Member States and their population while leading the global solidarity effort
- to ensure equitable and affordable access for all in the EU to an affordable vaccine as early as possible"
She hinted that members acting unilaterally would not be well received. This is well documented in plenty of places and I have provided that evidence in the past. Here’s an article explaining how and why the EU fell behind with that procurement:
https:/
“Specifically, the bloc’s decisions to prioritize process over speed and to put solidarity between EU countries ahead of giving individual governments more room to maneuver have been criticized for holding back the coronavirus response.”
“It also shows how a vaccine strategy that was supposed to be a forceful show of European solidarity, an assertion of the single market’s buying power and a moral stand against Trumpian “vaccine nationalism” resulted in a rollout that has left the EU lagging behind the United Kingdom and the United States.”
There is absolutely no doubt that, had the UK remained in the EU, whatever its apparent independence, it would have been sucked into all this and the procurement and rollout of supplies in this country would have been delayed.
Mr Johnson is quite correct: the UK achieved a faster rollout of Covid vaccines precisely because we were not bound by the processes the EU had determined. If there is any inhabitation of Cloud Cuckoo Land, you need to look a little closer to home.
You seem to relish in raising the same topics over and over again (presumably in the hope that eventually your point will stick). In that vein, I think we’ve done to vaccine thing once or twice (or maybe a hundred times) before. But just in case we haven’t, here’s an article that supports your view:
https:/
As I’ve said previously, I accept that the legislation in place at the time did not prevent the UK from going it’s own way. What I reject is the idea that it would actually have done so. Here’s a very important extract from the above article’s conclusions:
“For the vaccine rollout, the EU decided to work together for vaccine procurement and rollout, and it is possible that if the UK had still been in the EU it would have taken a different course, which meant vaccine rollout might have been slower.”
I would say it’s more than possible. I would suggest it’s an absolute stone cold certainty.
Mrs von der Leyen made it quite clear that vaccine procurement would be achieved on an EU wide basis and that the EU, not national governments, would secure supplies and control distribution. That is set out in this strategy paper:
https:/
"The objectives of the EU Vaccines Strategy are:
- to secure timely access to vaccines for Member States and their population while leading the global solidarity effort
- to ensure equitable and affordable access for all in the EU to an affordable vaccine as early as possible"
She hinted that members acting unilaterally would not be well received. This is well documented in plenty of places and I have provided that evidence in the past. Here’s an article explaining how and why the EU fell behind with that procurement:
https:/
“Specifically, the bloc’s decisions to prioritize process over speed and to put solidarity between EU countries ahead of giving individual governments more room to maneuver have been criticized for holding back the coronavirus response.”
“It also shows how a vaccine strategy that was supposed to be a forceful show of European solidarity, an assertion of the single market’s buying power and a moral stand against Trumpian “vaccine nationalism” resulted in a rollout that has left the EU lagging behind the United Kingdom and the United States.”
There is absolutely no doubt that, had the UK remained in the EU, whatever its apparent independence, it would have been sucked into all this and the procurement and rollout of supplies in this country would have been delayed.
Mr Johnson is quite correct: the UK achieved a faster rollout of Covid vaccines precisely because we were not bound by the processes the EU had determined. If there is any inhabitation of Cloud Cuckoo Land, you need to look a little closer to home.
//In reality the Commission takes it priorities from elected member state governments (the Council) and performs a role more akin to the British civil service.//
Really? Here’s an explanation of what the Commission does (from its own website, not the Daily Mail):
------------------
Principal roles in strategy and policy
The European Commission plays an active role in developing the EU's overall strategy and in designing and implementing EU policies. It evaluates and reports on its policies on a regular basis.
Setting strategic priorities
Along with the other main EU institutions, the European Commission develops the overall strategy and political direction of the EU.
Every five years, at the beginning of a new Commission term, the president of the Commission also determines the political priorities for its upcoming term of office.
The Commission turns these priorities into concrete actions on a yearly basis through an annual work programme, which sets out a plan of action for the next twelve months.
Developing and implementing policies
The European Commission develops and implements EU policies by
- proposing laws to the European Parliament and Council of the European Union
- helping EU countries implement EU legislation
- managing the EU's budget and allocating funding
- ensuring that EU law is complied with together with the Court of Justice
- representing the EU outside Europe together with the EU's diplomatic service, the European External Action Service
EU policies are designed to bring benefits to citizens, businesses and other stakeholders in the EU. Commission initiatives for new policies have to be agreed on internally according to a set procedure.
---------
Strangely I don’t see too much in that precis of any democratic oversight or of any input from “elected state governments.”
Here’s another passage explaining how “legislative Proposals” pass through the EU sausage machine (again from one of the EU’s many websites, not the Daily Mail):
https:/
-------
Right of initiative
The Commission is the only EU institution empowered to initiate EU legal acts. It submits proposals for EU legal acts on its own initiative, at the request of other EU institutions or following a citizens' initiative.
The procedure is launched when the European Commission submits a legislative proposal to the Council and the European Parliament. At the same time it sends the proposal to national parliaments and, in some cases, the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee for their examination.
Legislative proposals are adopted by the college of the members of the Commission either by written procedure (i.e. the text is not discussed) or by oral procedure (with a discussion). If a vote is requested, the Commission decides by simple majority.
------
Once again, I don’t see too much democratic oversight in that process and in particular I see for absolutely sure that the EU Parliament – upon which you hold so much reliability - is not able to initiate legislation.
Do you not read about these things or do you merely trot out what you believe to be true?
Really? Here’s an explanation of what the Commission does (from its own website, not the Daily Mail):
------------------
Principal roles in strategy and policy
The European Commission plays an active role in developing the EU's overall strategy and in designing and implementing EU policies. It evaluates and reports on its policies on a regular basis.
Setting strategic priorities
Along with the other main EU institutions, the European Commission develops the overall strategy and political direction of the EU.
Every five years, at the beginning of a new Commission term, the president of the Commission also determines the political priorities for its upcoming term of office.
The Commission turns these priorities into concrete actions on a yearly basis through an annual work programme, which sets out a plan of action for the next twelve months.
Developing and implementing policies
The European Commission develops and implements EU policies by
- proposing laws to the European Parliament and Council of the European Union
- helping EU countries implement EU legislation
- managing the EU's budget and allocating funding
- ensuring that EU law is complied with together with the Court of Justice
- representing the EU outside Europe together with the EU's diplomatic service, the European External Action Service
EU policies are designed to bring benefits to citizens, businesses and other stakeholders in the EU. Commission initiatives for new policies have to be agreed on internally according to a set procedure.
---------
Strangely I don’t see too much in that precis of any democratic oversight or of any input from “elected state governments.”
Here’s another passage explaining how “legislative Proposals” pass through the EU sausage machine (again from one of the EU’s many websites, not the Daily Mail):
https:/
-------
Right of initiative
The Commission is the only EU institution empowered to initiate EU legal acts. It submits proposals for EU legal acts on its own initiative, at the request of other EU institutions or following a citizens' initiative.
The procedure is launched when the European Commission submits a legislative proposal to the Council and the European Parliament. At the same time it sends the proposal to national parliaments and, in some cases, the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee for their examination.
Legislative proposals are adopted by the college of the members of the Commission either by written procedure (i.e. the text is not discussed) or by oral procedure (with a discussion). If a vote is requested, the Commission decides by simple majority.
------
Once again, I don’t see too much democratic oversight in that process and in particular I see for absolutely sure that the EU Parliament – upon which you hold so much reliability - is not able to initiate legislation.
Do you not read about these things or do you merely trot out what you believe to be true?
@10.23.Shh,Hymie,up here in Scotland the Scottish electorate keep voting in fools and idiots.Mainly of the SNP kind of eejits.Some say Labour will get back into power at Westminster,some say Labour will get back into power at Holyrood.Nah,both nationalist parties(the SNP and the Tories)will be back in power after the next election.Sad to say.
Latest Posts
The Barmy Army Of Barmy Brexiteers.
News0 min ago
Crosswords0 min ago
News1 min ago
Other Sports5 mins ago
Connections 321 - Sat 27 April
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.